I received a question earlier about the nature of obeah and wanga. Here is an answer I wrote on it sometime back:

"the obeah and the wanga": Obeah is clearly understood, being the methods arising out of Africa, and most commonly related to Voudoun. (The word is a Creolized smushing together of the West African dibia and the Twi bayifo, both of which refer to a type of naturopathic shaman. The word is most common in the West Indies and up into the Carolinas.) Of all the world's systems, it is one of the few major ones AC never did "learn and teach." He related this term as well to AVB; and there are those who see in this word a general Pagan implication. I would not give so broad nor so misdirected (nor so irresponsible) a meaning.

I see absolutely no reason not to take it literally and suggest that, whereas "mantras and spells" refers to Asia and Europe, "obeah" refers to Africa. Ultimately, all of the world's systems are to be assimilated into these teachings.

"Wanga" is a Central African (Congo &c.) word that refers to magick in general and, especially, to particular types of charged charms, talismans, potions, and powders of that tradition, and the magical means of creating and implementing them. In the New World the word took root in Haiti and spread to New Orleans (and adopted a day-to-day meaning of "wicked," e.g., "wanga belly" for an upset stomach).

Wand and sword probably refer to Will and Mind. They have clear distinctions between them, as in the "natural vs. invoked" quality of the Aces of these suits; or the Divine vs. the human psychological; mystical vs. magical, etc.

Again, I am not too worried about the exact curriculum here; only that a diverse, and likely world-spanning, array of magical and mystical subjects was to be part of what he taught. The Law alone was not adequate; he was enjoined to teach these many subjects, as a part of the program.

AC, of course, had his own interpretation of these subjects. I am not persuaded by his discussion of this; nor do I think it matters much. His Old Comment summed it up nicely: "An entirely new system of magic [sic] is to be learnt and taught as is now being done." Ultimately, he admitted ignorance of the details.

Excellent notes on the first passage cited here. Have you any insight to add to I:38? I can't be sure if the teacher has control specifically over the merciful/severe transmission of the ordeals or complete control over the creation of the ordeals themselves.

Zalthos wrote:Excellent notes on the first passage cited here. Have you any insight to add to I:38? I can't be sure if the teacher has control specifically over the merciful/severe transmission of the ordeals or complete control over the creation of the ordeals themselves.

Generally, no, the individual teacher doesn't provide these at all. That's rather Motta-esque. The teacher (i.e., Order superilor) has the task of delivering the system. But the Prophet was given a mandate to teach (compare Liber Magi) and control over the severity of the ordeals. This severity is still primarily controlled by the Beast - the initiatory-governing authority of the aeon.

Sometimes those in whose charge an initiate is placed will take upon themselves this judgment, leaning toward severity or mildness, but most of the time this results in problems. Chiefs of Temple of Thelema, for example, are instructed to simply "hold the walls in place," deliver the system as given to them, hold people on track to their own integrity and commitments. The best successes come when they do this exact thing, and little "speed bumps" occur if they try to go easy on someone or be overly harsh.